U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

24–907PDF 2006

SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT OF ‘‘THE OIL-FOR-FOOD

PROGRAM: THE SYSTEMATIC FAILURE OF THE

UNITED NATIONS’’

MARKUP

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND 

INVESTIGATIONS

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON 

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

DECEMBER 7, 2005

Serial No. 109–98

Printed for the use of the Committee on International Relations

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.house.gov/international—relations 

(II)

COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 

HENRY J. HYDE, Illinois, Chairman 

JAMES A. LEACH, Iowa 

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey, 

Vice Chairman 

DAN BURTON, Indiana 

ELTON GALLEGLY, California 

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

EDWARD R. ROYCE, California 

PETER T. KING, New York 

STEVE CHABOT, Ohio 

THOMAS G. TANCREDO, Colorado 

RON PAUL, Texas 

DARRELL ISSA, California 

JEFF FLAKE, Arizona 

JO ANN DAVIS, Virginia 

MARK GREEN, Wisconsin 

JERRY WELLER, Illinois 

MIKE PENCE, Indiana 

THADDEUS G. MCCOTTER, Michigan 

KATHERINE HARRIS, Florida 

JOE WILSON, South Carolina 

JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas 

J. GRESHAM BARRETT, South Carolina 

CONNIE MACK, Florida 

JEFF FORTENBERRY, Nebraska 

MICHAEL MCCAUL, Texas 

TED POE, Texas 

TOM LANTOS, California 

HOWARD L. BERMAN, California 

GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York 

ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American 

Samoa 

DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey 

ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey 

SHERROD BROWN, Ohio 

BRAD SHERMAN, California 

ROBERT WEXLER, Florida 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

WILLIAM D. DELAHUNT, Massachusetts 

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York 

BARBARA LEE, California 

JOSEPH CROWLEY, New York 

EARL BLUMENAUER, Oregon 

SHELLEY BERKLEY, Nevada 

GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California 

ADAM B. SCHIFF, California 

DIANE E. WATSON, California 

ADAM SMITH, Washington 

BETTY MCCOLLUM, Minnesota 

BEN CHANDLER, Kentucky 

DENNIS A. CARDOZA, California 

THOMAS E. MOONEY, SR., Staff Director/General Counsel 

ROBERT R. KING, Democratic Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND INVESTIGATIONS

DANA ROHRABACHER, California, Chairman 

EDWARD R. ROYCE, California 

JEFF FLAKE, Arizona, Vice Chairman 

MARK GREEN, Wisconsin 

MIKE PENCE, Indiana 

JOE WILSON, South Carolina 

WILLIAM D. DELAHUNT, Massachusetts 

HOWARD L. BERMAN, California 

EARL BLUMENAUER, Oregon 

ADAM B. SCHIFF, California 

GREGG RICKMAN, Subcommittee Staff Director 

GREGORY MCCARTHY, Professional Staff Member 

CLIFF STAMMERMAN, Democratic Professional Staff Member 

EMILY ANDERSON, Staff Associate 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page

MARKUP OF 

Subcommittee report of ‘‘The Oil-for-Food Program: The Systematic Failure 

of the United Nations’’ ......................................................................................... 1

LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING 

The Honorable Dana Rohrabacher, a Representative in Congress from the 

State of California, and Chairman, Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations: Prepared statement ............................................................................. 2

APPENDIX 

The Honorable Adam B. Schiff, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of California: Prepared statement ...................................................................... 7

(1)

SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT OF ‘‘THE 

OIL-FOR-FOOD PROGRAM: THE SYSTEMATIC 

FAILURE OF THE UNITED NATIONS’’

WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 7, 2005

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND INVESTIGATIONS, 

COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, 

Washington, DC. 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 12:42 p.m. in room 

2255, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Dana Rohrabacher 

(Chairman of the Subcommittee) presiding. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. I call this meeting of the Subcommittee on 

Oversight and Investigations to order. Pursuant to notice, I will 

call up the proposed Subcommittee report, ‘‘The Oil-for-Food Program: The Systematic Failure of the United Nations,’’ for purposes 

of markup and move it be adopted as the report of the Subcommittee. Pursuant to the Subcommittee rules, the report is considered as read. 

[The report is not reprinted here but can be found online at: 

http://www.house.gov/internationallrelations/109/

HIRClOFFP.pdf] 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Hearing no objection, today, we are marking 

up and adopting the Subcommittee report on the United Nations 

Oil-for-Food Program. This report is the product of a number of 

hearings of this Subcommittee, as well as the Full Committee, as 

well as the interviews of nearly 200 people and several thousands 

of documents reviewed by the Subcommittee and the Full Committee. 

What we have found in our investigation makes us question an 

unrealistic faith in the United Nations. In this case, the United Nations was entrusted with a program important for the United 

States national security and for the stability of the Middle East, 

and it was allowed to be corrupted by Saddam Hussein. Worse yet, 

that corruption reached into the highest levels of the United Nations. 

The lessons of this experience should guide our decisions in the 

future in terms of how much we will be relying upon the United 

Nations and other international organizations in terms of accomplishing missions important to the United States’ and the world’s 

stability. I suggest that if this is a report card as well as a report, 

we give the United Nations a failing grade on integrity, oversight, 

and competence. While our work on this subject is not completely 

over, this report signifies our views on the issues and our recVerDate Mar 21 2002 13:24 Jan 11, 2006 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\OI\120705M\24907.000 HINTREL1 PsN: SHIRL
2

ommendations on the performance of the United Nations in the 

Oil-for-Food Program, as well as our ideas for reform of the United 

Nations in general. 

With that said, I would like to now recognize Mr. Delahunt for 

his opening statement. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Rohrabacher follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE DANA ROHRABACHER, A REPRESENTATIVE

IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON

OVERSIGHT AND INVESTIGATIONS

Today we are marking up and adopting the subcommittee report on the United 

Nations Oil-for-Food program. This report is the product of a number of hearings 

this Subcommittee as well as the Full Committee has held, as well as interviews 

with nearly two-hundred people and several hundred thousand documents reviewed 

by the Committee. 

What we have found in our investigation makes us question unrealistic faith in 

the UN. In this case, the UN was entrusted with a program important for US national security and the stability of the Middle East and it was allowed to be corrupted by Saddam Hussein. Worse yet, that corruption reached the highest levels 

of the UN. The lessons learned from this experience should guide our decision-making in the future on the issues relating to the UN and other international organizations. If this is a report card, as well as a report, we give the UN a failing grade 

on integrity, oversight, and competency. 

While our work on this subject is not completely over, this report signifies our 

views on the issues and our recommendations on the performance of the United Nations in the Oil-for-Food program and our ideas for reform of the United Nations 

in general.

Mr. DELAHUNT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Despite our disagreements, and it is clear that there are many, I want to commend you 

personally and all of my Republican colleagues for their collective 

efforts. I also want to commend the Subcommittee’s Majority staff 

for their work. In particular, I want to recognize Gregg Rickman 

and Greg McCarthy. I know they worked hard in putting this report together, and I am also cognizant of the fact that that certainly was not an easy task. To all of you, you have earned our respect, and, obviously, you have our friendship. 

I also want to make clear that I agree with the report’s conclusion that there were serious problems with the Oil-for-Food Program, and there is undoubtedly a critical need to reform the UN 

so that it can best meet the challenges it faces. But I cannot support the report. That is because it has a fundamental flaw. 

It does not accurately reflect how the United Nations functions. 

It does not emphasize the reality that it is the member states, not 

the Secretariat, that possess the real power and ultimate responsibility at the United Nations. 

Mr. Chairman, with all due respect, this represents a missed opportunity for this Congress to do its job and to conduct oversight 

of the Executive Branch of our own Government. That is our constitutional prerogative and, I dare say, responsibility, and this Subcommittee is the panel with that oversight mandate. But the report 

neglects to fully address the role that the United States played in 

the Oil-for-Food Program. 

As a permanent member of the Security Council, the United 

States has significant responsibility for the creation and oversight 

of the program, and the United States had important obligations 

regarding enforcement of the sanctions on Iraq. The United States 

was in a position to make sure that Iraq’s contracts for the sale of 

3

oil and the purchase of humanitarian goods were clean. It was 

clear at the time that there was pervasive corruption. So it is important to determine what fault, if any, the United States has for 

those failures. 

This is not a partisan statement, I would point out. These failures occurred under both Republican and Democratic Administrations. As you know, I have repeatedly said that we should bring in 

all of the officials involved, regardless of their party affiliation, to 

answer our questions in a public venue. Let the chips fall where 

they may. 

The report also fails to make the critical distinction between 

sanctions and the Oil-for-Food Program. For example, it blames the 

UN Oil-for-Food contractors for not enforcing the sanctions regime, 

but it was the member states of the United Nations that bore that 

responsibility, particularly the Security Council and Iraq’s neighbors. The purpose of the Oil-for-Food Program was not to enforce 

the sanctions regime but to prevent a humanitarian catastrophe so 

that Saddam Hussein could not exploit the Iraqi people’s suffering 

in his campaign to end and circumvent the sanctions. In that, it 

had considerable success, and we know that the sanctions worked 

in regards to the issue of weapons of mass destruction. 

The report has other flaws. They are outlined in the additional 

and dissenting views that the Minority will submit. 

I, and others on our side, have consistently raised the issue of 

the Security Council’s 661 Committee. The United States was a 

member of that Committee, which was supposed to oversee both 

the Oil-for-Food Program and the sanctions regime. We need to determine how and why the United States made its decisions on that 

Committee. That would contribute to what we know about the failures of the program or violations of the sanctions regime, and it 

would provide us an opportunity to learn from our mistakes in case 

we need to craft any future sanctions regime. Unfortunately, we 

did no such oversight. 

We also brought up the question of trade protocols. These were 

formal agreements between Iraq and the Governments of Jordan, 

Syria, Turkey, and Egypt to violate the sanctions regime. They 

earned Saddam Hussein billions more than he was ever able to 

skim off of the Oil-for-Food Program. But the United States looked 

the other way. We need an explanation as to why. 

There are also questions about the possible role of the United 

States in the so-called ‘‘Khor al-Amaya Incident.’’ Just before our 

invasion of Iraq, seven tankers smuggled oil out of Iraq under the 

nose of the United States-led fleet in the Persian Gulf that was 

supposed to stop exactly this kind of smuggling. There are serious 

allegations that the United States did not just look the other way 

but may have actually assisted the smugglers. If so, we need an explanation. The American people deserve it. 

We have asked for an examination into how the United States 

administered Iraqi money from the Development Fund for Iraq, 

which the Coalition Provisional Authority used for running the government and for reconstruction after we assumed control. Our own 

Special Inspector General for Iraqi Reconstruction has found serious problems with how the United States managed billions of dollars of the Iraqi people’s money. We should know whether the 

4

United States was any better at managing Iraqi money than the 

United Nations. 

But, unfortunately, none of these issues has been addressed by 

the Subcommittee, and they are not covered in the report. It is a 

disappointment, Mr. Chairman, because it is our job, our function, 

our responsibility, to oversee the activities of the Executive Branch. 

I think the Chairman of the Full Committee said it best several 

years ago, and I am quoting Mr. Hyde:

‘‘The rules of the House of Representatives require us to perform ongoing oversight of the agencies under our jurisdiction. 

. . . A democracy thrives only if the people have confidence in 

the integrity of their public servants and institutions.’’

I urge my colleagues to vote against this report, and I yield back, 

Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Thank you very much, and I appreciate the 

Ranking Member’s, as well as all of the Members of this Committee in both parties, for the level of cooperation that we have 

had, not only on this issue but generally how we run ourselves 

here, considering the fact that there are some philosophical differences between us; we recognize that and respect that. 

I would note that this has been an investigation that was aimed 

at the United Nations Oil-for-Food Program. There are any number 

of tangential issues that would be of significance that would be interesting to look into and perhaps very enlightening to look into. 

However, we have had a large number of hearings on this issue 

and Syria, et cetera. We have just basically talked this issue to 

death for the last year, both at the Subcommittee level and the 

Full Committee level, although I will certainly agree with Mr. 

Delahunt that there are other areas that could have been covered. 

With that said, we have come up with a final report that I think 

we can be proud of, and certainly those of us on our side of the 

aisle believe that we can be proud of this. 

Are there any other Members who would like to speak on this 

issue? If not, the question occurs on the motion to adopt the Subcommittee report. All of those in favor will say ‘‘aye.’’

[A chorus of ayes.] 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. All of those opposed, say ‘‘no.’’

[A single no.] 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. In the opinion of the Chair, the ayes have it, 

and the motion is agreed to. 

Mr. DELAHUNT. Mr. Chairman? 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Without objection, the staff is directed to 

make the technical and conforming changes. 

Mr. DELAHUNT. Mr. Chairman, under Rule 11[p] of the Committee rules, each Member of the Subcommittee has the right to 

have views included as part of the report that is to be released. We 

have submitted our additional and dissenting views, and as I understand it, you will not release the report until our views are included. Is that correct? 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. That is correct. They will be included in the 

report, and hearing no objection, we will make sure that all Members do have this right to make their additions. 

5

So with that said, without objection, the staff is directed to make 

these technical and conforming changes, and, as Mr. Royce joins 

us, the Subcommittee now stands adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 12:55 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.] 

(7)

A P P E N D I X 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING RECORD

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE ADAM B. SCHIFF, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Mr. Chairman: Earlier this year, when it was announced that the International 

Relations Committee would be creating a new subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, I was excited by the prospect of serving on a body that would undertake the challenging and essential task of thoroughly overseeing the conduct of our 

nation’s foreign policy. 

Over the past two years I have made a number of speeches decrying the lack of 

congressional oversight of this administration and I looked at this subcommittee as 

an opportunity to rectify that deficiency. 

Unfortunately, we have spent the better part of a year almost entirely focused on 

the UN Oil for Food program, and neglected meaningful oversight of our own government and its institutions. Rather than focusing on the conduct of our own government in its role as a key driver of the UN’s policies towards Iraq over the last 

decade and a half, these hearings focused on the activities of the UN secretariat, 

UN employees and third parties contracted by the UN and member states to manage certain aspects of the Oil for Food program. 

Given the exhaustive work of the Volcker Commission and the additional details 

provided by Charles Duelfer in his investigation, the work of this committee could 

have been far more productively been focused on other issues. Unless our subcommittee’s ‘‘investigation’’ of Oil for Food was intended only as a part of a deliberate campaign to further undermine support for the United Nations in the Congress and among the American people, our time could have been better spent on 

matters that have completely evaded review and critique. 

As the dissenting views, which I endorse, states at the outset, the United Nations 

has serious structural and other flaws that make comprehensive reform an imperative if the UN is to continue to play a major role in international affairs in this new 

century. I also agree that Oil for Food dramatized many of the UN’s problems. 

What I object to, however, is the majority’s misleading conflation of Oil for Food 

with the much greater scandal of the trade protocols that were really at the heart 

of Saddam Hussein’s illicit oil trading regime in the period between the two Gulf 

Wars. This has been a hallmark of all of their public statements on Oil for Food 

and even when confronted with the truth they have continued to try to magnify the 

scope of the scandal by ‘‘ignoring’’ the fact that trade protocols and outright smuggling were not within the purview of Oil for Food. 

I think that the dissenting views produced by minority staff do an excellent job 

at capturing the shortcomings of the majority report—its warping of facts to fit preconceived findings, the use of unvetted sourcing, and its too-narrow focus on actions 

by UN staff. 

I am also pleased that Mr. Delahunt has taken the time to point out to the Chairman and our colleagues in the majority the numerous issues that they chose not 

to investigate in producing this report. I refer specifically to the conduct of the member states making up the 661 Committee, the seeming acquiescence by American 

officials to outright smuggling by Iraq and the reported mismanagement of the Development Fund for Iraq that was the successor to Oil for Food. There is a thread 

running through all three of these areas, Mr. Chairman, and it is that each of them 

would oblige us to look at the conduct of our own government. 

I urge the Chair and all of my colleagues to start fresh in the new year by engaging in meaningful oversight that will look at the core foreign policy challenges facing 

this country. I think that we need to review our own structures and policies in order 

to ensure that the American people are being well-served by their government. And 

8

I am not alone in my disquiet. In May 2004, Senator Chuck Grassley, the Republican chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, expressed his unease about the 

lack of oversight in Congress and admitted that legislative oversight was better 

when the Democrats controlled Congress. The majority in this Congress, Senator 

Grassley acknowledged, ‘‘has delegated so much authority to the executive branch 

of government, and we ought to devote more time to oversight than we do.’’

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Æ